421–430 of 465 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
All statistical inferences are estimates, and carry standard errors with them. What is your point?
All measurements are estimates, but sometimes the errors look like "we have a machine that spits out 4 all the time" and other times they look like "I saw two people, but I can't rule out the possibility that I spontaneously hallucinated them."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm a city native living in SF, but grew up all over the SFBAY including much, much rougher neighborhoods than anything I've experienced in SF. Several of my family members and myself have been assaulted/robbed in broad daylight, had cars stolen, and some have been shot by stray bullets due to a local gang fight. When I was in grade school someone brought a gun to class and showed it off by pointing it at me (!!) — a…
Generally, I feel like the Mercury News homicide map is a good representation of the roughness of the area, and it doesn't look like SF is as different from those areas as you propose. From the looks of it, it's one step up from dead last, Oakland. https://www.mercurynews.com/2022/01/04/bay-area-homicides-20...
So the street you want to avoid in SF is... Market Street?
That just reads like "don't go to Oakland."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I just moved NYC to Florida and I've been shocked how many other people have done the same. Florida is doing a relatively good job of attracting high end tech talent as far as I can tell. Texas is the other place I hear mentioned a lot.
The hypotheses I'm seeing are interesting. On one hand, lots of tech workers with kids move there for big yards and good weather. On the other hand, the universities are not up to scratch. And for college graduates and the young, moving to Florida isn't going to provide you with much if any career safety. I'm very interested in the future of Florida in a few years. It can go either way.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is so sad to me. The fracturing of the community because of capitalism. All these people that are moving away from their friends they are shortsighted. When they really need people no one’s going to be around them. Sad.
People are moving because of gross mismanagement by democrats.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree but I think this also understates the importance of just how messed up SF has become. I don't want to come into contact with human feces as part of my daily commute. I'm going to leave no matter what once that is the case. Especially when the equity in my two bedroom apartement is enough to buy the nicest house ever built in some other smaller city.
I see this argument constantly, that the streets run brown with human feces. I worked in SOMA for a decade, I would commute every day on BART and would walk from Montgomery Street Station or Embarcadero or Civic Center or 16th Street to wherever my office was at the time (different companies, different offices). SOMA was always pretty clean, Civic Center a bit more hit or miss, 16th Street was generally a bit dirtier…
So many houses in my SF neighborhood are currently empty. They're single family homes so I'm not sure of the impact on the overall population, but it's been weird around here. - For sale and empty. - Full renovations. Guessing more than half are flipping them, given the speed which construction started after sale. - Investors buying homes and keeping them empty.
On the 400 block of Arlington street, there are several large Victorian homes that have been empty for several years. There needs to be a tax on empty homes and a tax on people owning second homes that are empty.
People vote if SF has a good or bad government, by voting with their feet. Cities across the nation can have people leave due to remote work. This isn't remote work. This is a vote on if SF's government is great or bad.
Rents are up 15% YoY, which is probably a leading sign that demand is back. I know some folks might blame higher rents on greedy landlords… But it’s quite clear that at work this year’s class of new grad hires is moving to the Bay Area. What I think we saw is people left SF because there’s no point in doing remote work from a cramped, expensive apartment. So yes, it was a vote on governance. But for all SF’s problems…
Rampant and near-encouraged crime forced the hands of my SF friends to move. Some pass it off as a standard of living situation but they all moved to low crime Red states..
https://www.thirdway.org/report/the-red-state-murder-problem Takeaways: + The rate of murders in the US has gone up at an alarming rate. But, despite a media narrative to the contrary, this is a problem that afflicts Republican-run cities and states as much or more than the Democratic bastions. +In 2020, per capita murder rates were 40% higher in states won by Donald Trump than those won by Joe Biden. + 8 of the 10 s…
The problem with these types of sources is they are collected by journalists who do not back check their own work. They are trying to make a political point.
Crime statistics are based on reporting which is higher in Red states. Murder areas like Chicago have thousands of incidences of crime that go unreported.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Homeowners are a reliable political cohort, they tend to organize quickly as soon as any issues are on the agenda that might affect the value of their land and they will reliably push for whatever increases land values. They show up at city hall to make sure they are at least the loudest group on the issue. Homeowners are also diligent voters. You’ll need more than 50% of people to be renters to counter this, unless…
> Homeowners are a reliable political cohort, they tend to organize quickly as soon as any issues are on the agenda that might affect the value of their land and they will reliably push for whatever increases land values. I feel like this is a myth, do you have research to back this? As a 20+ year home owner, I've never been asked to support anything to increase land/housing value (not that I'd want to, since that me…
Because I got those all the time. If I didn't show up (which I often did, as a homeowner in the area just to see what they were proposing), all the old folks in the area (90% who owned) definitely did to shoot it down or ask for crazy demands that jack up the price. Sometimes they just filibuster in the vein of 'onion on my belt'.
You'll see big boards up talking about 'Planning Commission Meeting' or 'Meeting on a Proposed Development' at the site of any proposed work, public notices in the paper, and developers in an area are usually required to send notice mailers to every address in the area too in advance.
Those are typically what you see. People generally don't propose a zoning change titled 'Plan to screw over all the poor renters and make the homeowners rich', since that's a bit too obvious and would get thrown out in court. It would be something like 'Plan to develop lot XYZ into high density residential' (which may get shot down).
Many folks (including planning commissions) are happy to ask for on the surface reasonable stuff that makes projects economically unviable, or complain about how the extra traffic from all those people will place an undue burden on them and ruins their quality of life and 'the neighborhood character'. Those complaints are also real - having more people in a small place DOES increase traffic (even with public transit), DOES change quality of life and neighborhood character (better or worse depending on who you are), etc. Adding more parking WOULD be nice for many people, even if there isn't space for it on the lot (why not do a underground parking garage then! $$$)
Which if the planning commission doesn't weigh heavily will result in a rather short tenure for them, in my experience.
All of which raises property values, and decreases the overall number of people who can have accommodation in an area by reducing density.